Quote Originally Posted by devapriya
Even if a Word appaears in Sangam it need not be Tamil as TholKappiyar clearly says-

I say that a certain word is Tamil or not, by analysing the roots of the word. I have never depended on Sangam literature to prove my point. I do not refer to Sangam at all. Please go through all my posts. Can you point out one post in which I have said that it was used in sangam stanza and therefore it is a Tamil word!!

You have been referring to the sangam works to prove the existence of brahmanas during that age.

I want to tell you this: If a word is used in Rig Veda, it is not necessarily a Rigkrit word. According to "international scholars" (your terminology), there are MORE THAN 800 Tamil words in Rigkrit, a language which basically differs from latter-day Sans.

Presently, some "international scholars" (your terminology again) who have made research on Rig have isolated areas in it which clearly reveal aspects of "archaic Tamil" (their terminology) with Akkadian influence. On this basis, they are saying that at least some of the rishis who sang certain hymns were Tamils. (Mind you these are not Tamils who are saying it ) When the scholars publish their works, you should be able to happily read them. Then you will find Maalaa proving her case without any effort beyond all reasonable doubt to your utter dismay and collapse!!